Can you ignore subs during an unescorted amphibious assault?

Nice! thank you!

@Panther Perfectly yes. Thank you very much Panther. See you on the battlefront!

Jumping into this, here was a proposal to a bomb Italy strategy I used against my buddy.

He toyed with the ideal of buying a factory in the Balkans, I would choose Poland for Germany.( He did build a factory in Libya, which could only be bomber for 2 dollars.)

While expensive, Italy or Germany could then build the 1st infantry for 7 dollars , the second and third ones for 4 dollars. (since the max damage on a territory worth 3 is 6).

It still works out to +2 per unit built , but your “start up costs” are cheaper (3 vs 10) If Germany had heavy bombers, using a 3ipc factory would allow you to build 2 heavy bombers a turn for 29 ipcs. (with 3-5 heavy bombers and 2-4 planes on the board, the Atlantic will be empty near your coastlines, and with your starting infantry placed right, Russia will be afraid to move next to them. If the allies do land on your coast, use your next turn to clear their fleet from the board.

You could save “excess” money after you build 3 units, to repair Germany every other turn, or every third turn, for more units.

If you are saving for a big build, then with the little factory, you can place 3 inf a turn for 15 dollars (vs 21 in Germany)  and use the excess money every second or third turn in Germany itself. 21 minus 15 equals 6 dollars saved, paying for the cost of the factory in 3 turns. Just move the AA gun from the damaged German factory to the Poland one during noncombat.

They can bomb you, but you don’t lose any money until you make the repairs, so just think outside the box a bit.
Its not ideal, but it is a work around for an SBR strat.

Yea so if you catch an AC out at sea with out a DD you may get the ftrs too if they can’t land within 1 space.

@General:

In every game of axis and allies AA I have played… Subs havebeen useless.  Nobody has ever bought any subs.  Destroyers are so esily obtained and massed with a fleet they provide cover from subs.  Germany was famed for its “wolfpack” but in AA germany doesnt even get to build a fleet unless the allies are losing hard.

Can anyone advocate the use of subs for any power in the game?

I can’t.

Sorry if I repeat someone but here goes:

Point of Submarines:

If you build a significant number of them before the enemy, and the enemy cannot keep up with destroyers, you can have a cheaper win.

Odds of Success:

Minimal at best.  Your opponent would have to be pretty dense to let you amass a huge fleet of submarines without having at least 50% that number in defensive destroyers/bonus hits on battleships to soak them.

Realistic Outcome:

Either no one has submarines, or everyone has submarines and no one has a surface fleet.  It just seems that’s where things pan out.  This is awesome since no one can really win the game without surface ships since both sides have an island capitol.

I’ve seen a search roll used, maybe in aarhe, or somewhere, where you would roll to see if you could find the enemy ships, whether subs or surface within the zone because it’s so vast, and if found, then you could shoot.  you could increase it for each sub/destroyer perhaps.

Thats what we have and have always used namely the 1:1 ratio for determining how many subs are negated and also the number of rolls for search

and with a detroyer present, the sub cannot submerge.  makes sense.  thank you so much.

I agree.  The use of subs with aircraft is a gret combo for naval combat  (even better if you have super subs).  You can even make it cheaper if you have long range aircraft and jet fighter, transforming your fighters in better weapon than the original bomber.

I’m sorry to disagree, but long range aircraft benefits bombers so much it would be a waste to switch to fighters. Although saving 2 IPC per unit is nice, being able to bombard any territory or sea zone on the map at will is much too good to give up on - and thats what long range bombers do!